I guess we can stop worrying about climate – MIT says computer predicts end of world by 2040

From the “garbage in, doomsday out” department.

Apocalypse by 2040? Shock as MIT computer model predicts END DATE for civilisation

An apocalyptic computer model, processed by one of the world’s largest computers in 1973, has predicted the end of civilization  by 2040.

The prediction came from a programme nicknamed World One, which was developed by a team of MIT researchers and processed by Australia’s largest computer.

It was originally devised by computer pioneer Jay Forrester, after he was tasked by the Club of Rome to develop a model of global sustainability.

However, the shocking result of the computer calculations showed that the level of pollution and population would cause a global collapse by 2040.

This shows that the world cannot sustain the current level of population and industrial growth for more than two decades.

Australian broadcaster ABC has republished its original report from the 1970s, since there is just two years until a major change is expected according to the computer model.

The model based its predictions on trends such as pollution levels, population growth, availability of natural resources and quality of life on earth.

The eerie calculation has been remarkably accurate in certain predictions, such as a stagnated quality of life and diminishing pool of natural resources.

A fascinating forecast shows that the quality of life is expected to drop dramatically right after 2020.

At this time the broadcasters addreses the audience: “At around 2020, the condition of the planet becomes highly critical.

“If we do nothing about it, the quality of life goes down to zero. Pollution becomes so seriously it will start to kill people, which in turn will cause the population to diminish, lower than it was in the 1900.

“At this stage, around 2040 to 2050, civilised life as we know it on this planet will cease to exist.”

Source: Express UK

 

Advertisements

194 thoughts on “I guess we can stop worrying about climate – MIT says computer predicts end of world by 2040

  1. The world will die of massive brain death before then, because all semblance of standards of excellence will have been abandoned, causing people of Earth to crash into one another, mindlessly trying to satisfy their reflexive desire to glue to their mobile devices, to stay connected in their now totally meaningless lives, causing a cascade of accidents that will wipe out much of the human population.

    • The metaphor for this syndrome was already named in the 70ies. It was called ‘the Borg Collective’.

      • I never could finish that movie. When I got to the part where the main character was sitting in the theater watching the “butts” movie, I felt just like he did: this is too stupid and vapid and be funny. Why am I watching this? It was at this point I realized the movie was trolling its own viewers and was saying “only idiots would watch the rest of this movie”.

    • Well, you make one fundamental mistake, EVERYONE is not glued to their phones since EVERYONE doesn’t have one.

      OK, one more, only the media is projecting that “all semblance of standards of excellence…have been abandoned.” Humans will always strive for more.

      “All progress is based upon a universal innate desire on the part of every organism to live beyond its income”― Samuel Butler, The Way of All Flesh

    • I thought it was someone said “no pressure”, pushed a big red button, and you exploded in a shower of blood….

    • Well, but this is really good news. It means that there is no point in my replacing my 2003 Compaq Presario computer after all, because everything including electronic communications will just go POOF!, doesn’t it?

      I’ll just put more money into some wines that I like, dress like a permanent inhabitant of the Renaissance Faires, and finish up with those stories I’ve been working on for so long.

      I love those doomsday stories. I keep hoping that the purveyors of that nonsense will take it on themselves to vacate the planet so that the rest of us can just get on with our lives.

      Cheers!

  2. This is from 1973 and they are just now getting excited about it? Send these loons hair shirts and sandwich boards emblazoned with “The End Is Nigh!” The only way our quality of life will go down is if people listen to all these ecotards.

    • Or else it a Harold Camping model predicting the day of the Rapture. Even Camping gave up after so many misses.

      • Well, why not have both? Let’s just be inclusive about it, eh?

        Oh, I didn’t see anything about where this is supposed to happen. Is there a particular spot where it starts and then cascades, or does everything just go POOF! all at once?

        I like to have clarity on this kind of thing.

    • “… processed by one of the world’s largest computers in 1973…”

      In other words, something significantly less powerful than a five-year-old smartphone… just to put things in perspective. Think maybe they simplified the models a bit?

      • ” Think maybe they simplified the models a bit?”
        ——————–
        A 1973 doomsday model on a 1973 supercomputer is just less precisely false than a state of the art doomsday model.

        • And no accounting for the technology and biological breakthroughs since 1973? This line of thinking supports the notion that we are just idle blobs awaiting our fates…..

    • typical of aunty abc in aus to latch onto such drivel too;-(
      it’s embarrassing to a high degree, really it is!
      guess i know what r williams will be running on the NOT very Science show very soon
      presently being screwed over yet again by the NEG power deal being done TO us not for us

    • If indeed this computer model was at the behest of the Club of Rome and modeled from their paradigms, then if nothing else this should demonstrate that the Club of Rome has no clue how to model sustainability and their credibility is junk.
      If their plan for the future ends civilization in 2040 in a mere 70 years, then its not much of a plan.

      • Club of Rome gave us all sorts of Globalists stuff – including pushing the AGW meme. Read their own words here:
        http://green-agenda.com

        Their statements are less than worthless – whatever they are saying, the opposite should be done. Fortunately the Italian Lega Nord are now in charge of Rome (thanks to the Italians who are now woke for real after being invaded).

  3. Well it’s a computer model from MIT so it must be right.

    Why haven’t any computer models been able to predict what has actually happened since, say, the 1960s or so? The world has gotten better overall, people are richer, people are largely more free, fewer as a percent are killed by disease and starvation and even natural disasters, the environment is cleaner – especially in the “developed” world – than ever before in history.

    All of the Man-made calamities mostly come from oppressive, tyrannical governments.

    • Not Chicken Little sez:
      “Well it’s a computer model from MIT so it must be right.”

      It’s not right. It’s wrong!
      I have been studying this problem
      since the 1970’s, and my model,
      which is so complex I can barely
      understand it, but it was peer reviewed,
      and the peers were so excited
      they said “what the he-ll is this?”,
      which of course was just their jealousy,
      but getting to my point, and I do have one,
      the world will end in 2039, not 2040 —
      those MIT nerds have no idea what they
      are talking about.

    • “All of the Man-made calamities mostly come from oppressive, tyrannical governments.”

      Yes, that’s true. And this did not seem to be addressed in this computer program.

      Big wars are the big danger in the future. If we can manage to avoid big wars, I think we will manage to avoid the other human-caused scenarios.

  4. “The eerie calculation has been remarkably accurate in certain predictions, such as a stagnated quality of life and diminishing pool of natural resources.”

    What planet is this writer from?

  5. All gone by 2050? Okay then all the alarmists can keep on consuming, business as usual, phones, cars, power, flying, heating, cooling, but just remember it is still the den!ers faults, somehow.

  6. Club of Rome were/are Malthusians so it should not be surprising that a program devised for them should give Malthusian results.

  7. The truth is that in 1973 the world was a turning into a real shit hole. So extrapolating from that it was probably an accurate estimation. But once again, inanimate objects do not and cannot understand human resolve and resourcefulness. I guess that goes for progressives too.

  8. Personally I prefer the Doomsday Clock, requires zero electricity, easier to adjust (just two fingers) and changes are instantaneously reflected in real time with zero floating point error. Puts that MIT supercomputer algorithm to shame and just a few decades too late…….what a bunch of amateurs.

  9. “At this stage, around 2040 to 2050, civilised life as we know it on this planet will cease to exist.”

    Good. I’m tired of most people anyway.

    • I’m actually grateful to see this. The next time I have a discussion with someone who believes the global climate models, I’ll throw this at them.

    • I’m actually happy with the fact that civilized life as we know it ceased to exist from the 70’s. We are much better off now.

  10. This model is a bit less apocalyptic than the first Club of Rome computer study, so that is why it has stayed on the shelf since 1973. The original Cof R study would have us all dead already.

  11. Note to UK Express:

    Stop allowing non-native English speakers to write copy for your English-speaking audiences. That story is damn near unreadable. It must be “interpreted” by what one thinks a non-native speaker is trying to communicate.

    Absolutely appalling.

    • So he predicted it to shut up the Chicken Littles of his day. Hmm, how could we apply this lesson today? Oh I know, just pay Bill Nye enough to come out and predict the world will end in 3060.

  12. This can be used as a prize example of “Garbage In = Garbage Out” in computer science.

    A computer model is a type of “game” built around math and statistics. Most computer programmers do not understand statistics…in fact I can honestly say most computer programmers do not understand how to program very well – they hack at a piece of code until it “appears” to do whatever it is they thought it should do and move on. It is rare to find a programmer who is careful and reasoned in their programming and especially in their testing.

    Combine this with people who pretend to understand very complex systems and you get such monstrosities as Climate Models. So a model of humanity and sustainability would be even harder, because not only is it complex with many unknown constants (how much resource X do we have?) and variables (how fast will we use it in the future?) but it ALSO has to contend with people who can decide to behave differently, impacting many of the variables (how fast were we using that resource X again?).

    But how do you test a model that predicts things that haven’t happened? You study the trends obviously. This model has FAILED, the trends demonstrate it.

    By the way, if it can’t be known (at the time you run your model), then you are entering guesses (another name for garbage) into your model. It doesn’t even matter if your model correctly predicts one thing – that can be a coincidence. It has to be right all (or at least most) of the time to be of any use. So making a single prediction is, well, a waste of time.

    • I wish there was a +100 button, because I would have used it on this reply. You are absolutely correct.

  13. remarkably accurate in certain predictions, such as a stagnated quality of life and diminishing pool of natural resources.

    Substitute, ‘repeatedly disproved predictions, such as …’

    Julian Simon got it right in 1980 (213 kb pdf here).

    There is no crisis in resources, in population, or in pollution. This has been known for 40 years, now, and still the press gets it 100% wrong.

    It’s doom-porn and they’re addicted to it. For the children, no doubt.

  14. “The eerie calculation has been remarkably accurate in certain predictions, such as a stagnated quality of life and diminishing pool of natural resources.”..my quality of life has vastly improved and keeps on improving….MAGA

    It predicted fracking, GMO’s, and genetic engineering……….it also predicted the pause

    • Born in a house with no in-door plumbing; heated by a pot bellied stove. 62+ years later I’m in a 4-bedroom ranch property with pool and property. That back-water where I was born: Lake Oswego, Oregon, a posh upscale urban paradise. Whatever these wiseguys are talking about it doesn’t describe me, doesn’t describe my surroundings, and doesn’t describe any reality I know of. I’m not the only one:
      https://ourworldindata.org/extreme-poverty

    • According to all statistics, outside of certain socialist/communist hell-holes, the quality of life for just about everyone has gone up by huge amounts.

      The proven reserves of just about every resource is greater now than it was in the 70’s as well.

      PS: If we should ever start to run low on any type of metal, or paper, or plastic, we’ll just mine today’s waste dumps.

  15. Is, the “Club Of Rome” really concerned about ALL mankind? Could they instead really be an organization funded and/or created (one of many I believe) by the rich who are concerned that if the world goes crap, they and their future family members won’t be able to enjoy all of their immense wealth?
    From readings and reports from organizations such such as the Club Of Rome, they call for global government and global control of resources, arms, and population. That to me sounds like something rich people would prefer so that the world is tightly policed and hence, safe and protected from any global catastrophic issues that could cause them to not enjoy their vast wealth.

    So, maybe having rich people around IS a good thing for mankind?

    They do after all, don’t have to worry about the ‘small’ things that us average folk worry about such as food, shelter, jobs, healthcare, etc. So either they are really are smarter than us which would explain their wealth and far-sighted thinking for all of mankind and/or they have time to think about the BIG things that really matter that just aren’t on our radar.

    In my opinion, I think the rich mainly care about preserving the world so that they and their future families don’t lose out on all of the wealth that they’ve accumulated.

    • I’ve been saying for decades that the biggest reason why these guys want restrict if not end air travel for the masses, is because it will reduce the crowds at the best vacation spots.

      • That thought has crossed my mind as well but not as the biggest reason.

        And don’t forget, less pesky air travelers flying means less demand for jet fuel which means lower prices for jet fuel for their private jets…

        Bet they’d love to be able to drive to airports on streets with few cars, then go to sparsely populated airports with their private jets fueled up with cheap jet fuel. It’d be a win-win-win for these ‘important’ leftist people.

        • Counterintuitively the price of fuel would go up if they were producing less, and transporting less (to fewer locations). The fixed costs would remain about the same but production would be far lower thereby increasing the per-unit costs. Running large refineries at below optimal level is more expensive as well.

  16. One of the basic assumptions built into the computer modes was that Progressives would be in charge – WHOOPS!

  17. Some interesting excerpts from a 1974 NYTimes article on another report to the Club of Rome:

    “A planned world economy whose sectors would be assigned complementary roles was proposed today in an international study as the most effective way to avert a breakdown in global stability.
    The study calls for such drastic measures as annual investments of $250- billion by the industrialized nations to help the poor countries become economically self-sufficient.”

    Wow, 250 billion a year in 1974 is 1,277,920,892,494.93 in today’s inflation adjusted dollars (if I used the right calculator…)

    ““The Limits to Growth,” that was criticized in some quarters as being oversimplified and placing too much emphasis on “doomsday” predictions.
    The new project is critical of the earlier one. It calls for “organic” growth, rather than halt to growth that, in the words of its co-leader, Dr. Mihajlo Mesarovic, would “institutionalize inequalities.”
    “Organic” growth of the world economy would be controlled much like the growth of a body.”

    “Now is the time to draw up a master plan for organic, sustainable growth and world development based on global allocation of all finite resources and a new global economic system.

    “To bring the world into stable equilibrium, the report says, will require a basic reorientation of the world economy. The “preposterous waste” of material resources by the most advanced nations will have to be curtailed, it says.
    “Our frivolous use of energy,” it adds, “takes food from the mouths of children.”

    “The reasoning is that this would stimulate continued over-consumption of oil and delay the development of alternate energy sources until the Middle East fields were running dry, in about 2010.

    Opps, another environmental prediction a little off…

    “The world, it said, must shed the “futility of narrow nationalism.””

    source:
    https://www.nytimes.com/1974/10/10/archives/study-says-developing-nations-must-get-extensive-aid-report.html

      • They reason they want to develop undeveloped countries is this: Fertility rates are lower in developed countries. (WOuldn’t be surprised if they also want to “capitalize’ on the transformations of these economies during the process).

        Main thing though (from my interpretations of what I’ve read) is they want to lower the population growth in LDCs.
        Simply put, if you have women working instead of staying home, you have less babies being born. This fact is why I believe that there has been) and is to this day, so much focus on getting women into the workplace in developed countries and in the emerging economies of the LDCs. They want women working NOT because of equal human rights or feminism, they want them working so that their baby factories are on hiatus.

    • I used to see a guy like that almost every day on my lunch hours. He had a carefully outlined list of all the invading space aliens, prophecies, denizens of the Netherworld, not including Chthulhu, and how much money he’d need to survive. People would give him $1 to $5 to make him go away.
      So who was the dumber of the two in that?

  18. The good news is that now we don’t have to worry about ‘global warming’ any more. I’m gonna stop paying taxes and splurge on my credit cards.

    Anyone got a boat and motorcycle for sale? Where’s the best whorehouse in Texas?

  19. Bugger! the time frame is probably a smidgeon (or two) beyond my reasonable expectations of being a first-hand witness. I hope the rest of you can celebrate another demonstrated massive fail on my behalf!

    • From the billboard top 100 I’ll take : #51 — Dr. Hook and The Medicine Show —The Cover Of Rolling Stone

      This was the original rap expose’ in 1973

    • 1973

      1 Tony Orlando and Dawn Tie A Yellow Ribbon ‘Round The Ole Oak Tree
      2 Jim Croce Bad Bad Leroy Brown
      3 Roberta Flack Killing Me Softly With His Song
      4 Marvin Gaye Let’s Get It On
      5 Paul McCartney and Wings My Love
      6 Kris Kristofferson Why Me
      7 Elton John Crocodile Rock
      8 Billy Preston Will It Go Round In Circles
      9 Carly Simon You’re So Vain
      10 Diana Ross Touch Me In The Morning
      11 Vicki Lawrence The Night The Lights Went Out In Georgia
      12 Clint Holmes Playground In My Mind

      PaulH, you be diss’n my year!

      ~¿~

      My name is Michael, I’ve got a nickel, I’ve got a nickel shiny and new
      I’m gonna buy me all kinds of candy, that’s what I’m gonna do

  20. Malthusian Theory:

    “..In 1798 Malthus published anonymously the first edition of An Essay on the Principle of Population as It Affects the Future Improvement of Society, with Remarks on the Speculations of Mr. Godwin, M. Condorcet, and Other Writers.The work received wide notice. Briefly, crudely, yet strikingly, Malthus argued that infinite human hopes for social happiness must be vain, for population will always tend to outrun the growth of production. The increase of population will take place, if unchecked, in a geometric progression, while the means of subsistence will increase in only an arithmetic progression. Population will always expand to the limit of subsistence and will be held there by famine, war, and ill health. “Vice” (which included, for Malthus, contraception), “misery,” and “self-restraint” alone could check this excessive growth….”.

    Source: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Thomas-Malthus.

    I don’t know for certain how popular Malthusian thinking still is today after 220 years, but the fear of food production and resource shortages due to population growth seems to have been eclipsed (for the time being anyway) by the climate alarmist narrative. And today, 50 years after the prediction failures of “The Population Bomb,” this mindset has been shown to be the product of those who have little or no faith in the ability of humanity to innovate and resolve problems (perhaps even before they start).

    I for one still have faith our ability to continually improve the human condition if stupidity doesn’t get in the way (and that is a big IF). For those who don’t, I guess there are websites on the Internet of companies that can actually make a sandwich board for you saying “The End Is Nigh” (or some such thing) if one is really inclined to demonstrate how much of a fool he can be in public. Bill McKibben and company are planning another climate march in San Francisco (where else) on Sept. 8th. Judging from his tweets, he must be really looking forward to it.

    Whenever I hear someone say or imply that they are “saving the planet,” I simply remind myself that we humans will probably go extinct millions or billions of years before the Earth begins dying out (depending on how many more years of life our Sun has). It all depends on how it happens and when our time comes. And a 100,000 years after we are gone, Ma Nature probably won’t even remember that we were ever here. For all I know, there could be a massive meteor on its way here right now with our number on it.

    All of this leaves me wondering how much the human intellect really has evolved since Malthus’ day. Perhaps nowhere near as much as we would like to believe.

    • As long as there’s a way to make money vending impending extinction, there will be those who are gifted with the knack for retailing it en masse.

    • At the time, Malthus’ understanding of population dynamics was probably up to date. But just as in most other subjects, the state of human knowledge has advanced since then and we now know that their ideas were incomplete. This doesn’t diminish the genius of the top thinkers of the time (whether you include Malthus in that group or not); Newton was not a dolt because he didn’t know about relativity. But, this does mean that their theories are incomplete/invalid and should not be relied on. At least not without taking into account what we have learned since then.

  21. Did this model successfully predict socio-political and influences of now historic calamitous events that hadn’t happened yet when it was run?

    What parameters did they base the model on, anyway?

  22. These predictions seem to overlook that past predictions were wrong because we humans don’t just sit around waiting for the disaster to occur. We are constinctly advancing technology to overcome these problems. According to some like Paul Ehrlich, he wrote in 1968 mass starvation was going to wipe us out in the 1980’s. These people seem to forget that we have a strong will to survive.

  23. In 22 years, the children being born today will be entering the work force.
    The education they receive either will or will not prepare them for what is in front of them.
    We have allowed the Progressive establishment to take over our schools, colleges, and universities.
    A progressive establishment that has turned today’s young adults into snowflakes and Beebos(1).

    So the prediction may be accurate unless the Liberals are tossed out on their ass today, and a semblance of critical thinking and reasoning is returned to our campuses.

    (1) Lost young adults with “a few screws loose.”

    • Joel, there are many of our local kids here who are true conservatives. They have been subjected to the socialist academic environment, gotten their degrees by playing along peacefully and just ignoring the indoctrination. Once they return to the community they tell the rest of us how screwed up their alma-mater was. Gives me hope.

  24. A fascinating forecast shows that the quality of life is expected to drop dramatically right after 2020.

    Yall better hope the Don does it again,……… cos if he doesn’t that will come true.

  25. 1973 huh? Using the “one of the world’s largest computers”?

    Not impressed.

    In 1996 programmers developed software that using the latest generation computers attempted to map the entire history of the civilised world from 4000BC out into the near future. The aim was to discover if it was possible to build a civilization that would stand the test of time.

    What did they discover?

    Gandhi loves his nukes!

    Jokes aside, I would take Sid Meier over Club of Rome any day.

    • That was my first thought as well, just what did we have for computing power then? I worked on the 32-bit CPU in the early 80s and remember a Mb of memory was $1000 in the late 80s. I had a hand-held basic-programed computer with a qwerty keyboard that had 50K of memory. I’d bet a modern smart phone is more powerful than anything from the early 70s.

      • That’s for sure, any supercomputer of the 70’s would have had to crunch numbers for decades to do just a modern climate model. How could it run enough factors involved to give a year’s predictions, much less the end of society? Keep in mind, though, that society was mesmerized at that time by the advances of science and the wonder of computers. Much GIGO could exist with little informed public scrutiny.

  26. Hmm, I’m 59 years old, so in 2040 I’ll be 81. My old man died at 83. I figured I might make it to 90, but 81 is fine. Sucks for everyone younger than me, but whatever.

    Sounds like total BS, but even if it’s true it changes pretty much none of my plans.

  27. The super computer in 1973 was eclipsed by the TI 30 hand held calculator a few years later. Back in 73 we still had Freon. And we knew that the Russians would only ever bomb us on the first Tuesday of the month at 10:00 am.

  28. In which movie does one character say, “I hear the world is going to end tonight. I think I’ll just go home and watch it on television.”?

  29. A bit of hubris, calling yourself the “Club of Rome.” More apt would be the “Club of Barstow.”

  30. “Quality of life will go down to zero” awe damn, and we were just about to turn it to 11.

  31. Okay. Then we should have a big party until that time.

    But, of course, the predictions I heard back in the early to mid 70’s also talked about how we would be out of oil by 1990. From an old contest show: “Tell him what he didn’t win Jay”

    The truth is that peak oil has been predicted again and again, and yet we are awash in it. That’s because the assumptions about things like resources never takes into account innovation, and the things the price signal can incentivize. People look at a snapshot in time and are simply unable to look beyond what they know.

    Even if we ran out of something like Uranium (fat chance), we could extract Uranium from sea water. The prediction is always “if nothing changes in our knowledge”.

    • “Say say two thousand four zero party over, oops, out of time
      So tonight I’m gonna party like it’s two thousand thirty-nine”

      Yeah, that can work.

    • Prediction of human demise always discounts human ingenuity.
      Can’t remember who said it first.
      Maybe it was in an Adam West Batman script.

  32. So glad to know. I I’ll be 88 by then and now I can plan my retirement and make sure we consume every penny we worked so hard for.
    I graduated as agricultural engineer when the first report came out and must admit that it impressed me.
    Indeed, in those days, computers could not be wrong. It took me a number of years to understand the limits of simulated computer predictions (when I was working on my PhD)
    I was told that Gore was a member of the club. Can anyone confirm this?
    In any case it looks as if this Malthusian inspired attack on humanity fizzled out and then they invented the climate scare. That gave them a better run for their money – for our money I mean -with trillions wasted that could have been put to a much better use, such as electrification of the world.

  33. I love the “Garbage In, Doomsday Out” slogan, it could apply to any climate model …

    Thanks for a good laugh, Anthony.

    w.

  34. Only God the Father (of the Bible) has determined the end of the world as we know it. When Jesus returns, all people will see Him at the same time and know.

  35. Is this computer program one that was written in or shortly before 1973? Without accounting for pollution controls such as catalytic converters, positive crankcase ventillation, and coal-fired power plants getting “scrubbers” and diesel engines becoming made less-polluting? Without accounting for modern technology that makes automatic transmissions in modern cars as efficient as ideally-operated manual transmissions? Or cars getting smaller and lighter in the US after the mid 1970s? Without accounting for increased farm productivity due to more CO2, cold temperatures warming while extreme hot temperatures are hardly warming, and advancing technologies including GMO technology?

    • You must be kidding. “Or cars getting smaller and lighter in the US after the mid 1970s?”
      Have you been in a parking lot to observe this recently?

  36. Along the lines of Deep Thought in a Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy: so we got an answer to when civilization will end, but did nobody think to first ask Australia’s largest supercomputer to define what “civilization” is?

  37. ” The model based its predictions on trends such as pollution levels, population growth, availability of natural resources and quality of life on earth.”

    Let us take these things 1 by 1.

    1) Pollution levels- Even the Chinese are starting to clean up their act on pollution. Even though there are 5 trillion pieces of plastic in the world’s oceans and we are all eating and drinking plastic, there doesnt seem to be any explosion in stomach cancers.
    2) Population growth- The World Bank and WHO project world population to be 9.2 billion by 2040 based on current downward trend in the growth rate. Our societies can easily survive with that many people provided we don’t kill ourselves with nanotechology and /or nuclear weapons.
    3) Natural resources- The world has never run out of any natural resource ever. Even mahogany is still being harvested albeit illegally in many countries. Whenever a resource starts to get scarce the price goes up and people substitute. The ivory trade has been banned and replacement plastics and resins are used instead. Peak oil has been debunked so many times , I wont even bother to explain it.
    4) Quality of life- Ask any African over 60 whether his kids are better off then he was? Quality of life has never been better on the planet even though a billion people are still without electricity. 35 years ago it was over 1.5 billion without electricity. People are living longer and are getting more medical aid to cure medical problems that 100 years ago, they would have had to live with. Today with the internet most of the planet has a library at their fingertips. As Willis Eschenbach would say WHATs NOT TO LIKE?

  38. Quality of life goes to zero? Even the apocalyptic movies show life persisting after a collapse. That is clearly not zero. Broad generalizations always lead to largely stupid conclusions. If the wonderful computer model presented here had reasonable assumptions based on the history of failures predicted resource failures and included the apparent ingenuity of humans, it would have shown different results, unless, of course, their goal was to show apocalypse regardless. Then, it’s a done deal—they got what they wanted.

    What most of these people seem to ignore is that, whenever some resource becomes scarce or too expensive, we have yet to fail in finding a cheaper and more abundant replacement. That’s what we do. Humans. As we miniaturize our devices, we are actually using less and less of the component elements. Yep.

  39. Jay Forrester died just 2 years ago at age 98.
    He was smart. I wonder how much he made off such fools.
    An interesting review of a book I remember, Urban Dynamics, is here: LINK

  40. Leftist eco-warriors are so hilarious…

    Whenever my Leftist friends start bemoaning the imminent demise of all life on earth from manmade pollution, I show them EPA data on the incredible DECLINE of REAL pollutants in the US just since 1980:

    https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-national-summary

    Just since 1980, REAL pollutants have been slashed as follows:
    Carbon Monoxide: DOWN 84%
    Lead: DOWN 99%
    Nitrogen Dioxide: DOWN 63%
    Ozone: DOWN 32%
    Particulates (2.5 microns): DOWN 41% (just since 2000…)

    As Leftists say, “Pollution is getting more worser and more worser.”…..

    Yeah, we’re all gonna die by 2040 from evil fossil fuel pollution–not so much…

    Leftism is a mental disease….

  41. To the contrary, Stephen Pinker’s latest, an exhaustively documented tale of the ongoing improvement of the human condition.

    https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/35696171-enlightenment-now

    (Excerpt from linked article below,)
    “If there’s anything the Enlightenment thinkers had in common, it was an insistence that we energetically apply the standard of reason to understanding our world, and not fall back on generators of delusion like faith, dogma, revelation, authority, charisma, mysticism, divination, visions, gut feelings or the hermeneutic parsing of sacred texts.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/feb/11/reason-is-non-negotioable-steven-pinker-enlightenment-now-extract

    Note that the editors of The Guardian have abandoned rational standards, for spelling. Or either fired all the proofreaders.

  42. I read downwards quickly expecting to see the result of the rerun but there was none.

    42 remains unproven. 😀

  43. Repent! The End is Nigh!
    Now where have we heard this before?
    Ah yes, from that bearded, wild-eyed, nutter shambling along the street.

  44. Actually this sounds very much line the Club of Rome “Limits to Growth” projection, which of course was updated in 2005, and was an early attempt to project the future of the Earth but failed to take into consideration possible changes in technology and behavior.
    Possibly a semi-useful forecast of what may happen if we don’t take action and what action we need to take but not very accurate as a prediction.
    Like saying your car will hit a wall if you don’t change direction or slow down.

  45. I stopped reading at “Club of Rome”…
    This proves that you can make any model predict what you have been tasked to predict.

  46. I think this is great news!! Since the CoR consider themselves to be the “civilized”, their own computer predicts they will be gone by 2050. Ding dong … the witch is dead.

    Then the rest of us can go about life as usual.

  47. If the model said that the world would come to an end due to a major conflict between modern radical socialists and liberty loving free market capitalists I might put some faith in the prediction. Yet it doesn’t appear that they even include political conflicts. Oh yea, all political conflict and present day wars are because of CAGW, sorry I forgot (sarcasm).

  48. Funny thing, the population has kept growing, while the environment has been getting cleaner.
    As always, they program the models with what they want to happen, not what will happen.

  49. “one of the world’s largest computers in 1973”

    You realize that the phone in your pocket is faster, and has more data storage than that 1973 computer, don’t you.

    I was a grad student at the University of Michigan in the early 1970s. The US Air Force had just bought a shiny new IBM 360/67 for the University. It was housed in its own building and the mechanical bits took up a good portion thereof. It had 1.5 megabytes of RAM. It cost $14 million (~$85 million in 2018 money).

    The $225 phone in my pocket has 2GB of RAM., and 8 core 2GHz processor a separate graphics process or and 160GB of fixed memory. Your phone is better than mine.

  50. I wonder how accurate the predictions would be if you applied the program to say an individual city or country?
    Beijing and Paris are both heavily polluted.
    Venezuela, Greece, and Italy are failing economically.
    Brazil, Africa and a couple of other countries have various population problems.
    Overall, the world isn’t going to fail in the next couple of years, but it wouldn’t surprise me if some more “isolated” areas do fail.

  51. Yeah, it was the population bomb in the 70’s, nuclear winter in the 80’s, running out of oil in the 90’s, Y2K, Global Warming, Climate Change, Climate Disruption (when Climate Change wasn’t scary enough), SMOD, and on and on. Being a “scientist” and predicting the end of the world doesn’t seem any more accurate than a guy with long hair and a sandwich board sign. I’m sure the solution, as usual, is to place a small group in charge of EVERYTHING, and dramatically alter the way of life of everybody else.

  52. The world’s largest computer in 1973 had less memory space than a laptop has today, so its predictions were probably worse than today’s climate models, which have also proven to be inaccurate. Weren’t the “experts” predicting an ice age back in 1975?

  53. I guess the largest computer in Australia is a PDP-8…
    One would think that after many failed 20-year doomsday predictions since the 1960s, they would at least try to not look like fools.

  54. Newtonian physics, and the philosophical ideas of determinism derived from it, should have died with the acceptance of relativity, and should have been buried in the deepest of holes forever with the revelations of quantum physics. But no. Inflated egos continue to cling to simple linear projections of trends that are poorly measured and entirely misunderstood, in the hopes that they will be seen as important!

    This story is pathetic. The idea behind it is pathetic. Yet, this pathetic idea that we can make accurate, linear projections of poorly measured and poorly understood, complex, coupled, non-linear systems lives strongly in those ignorant fools who wish to control the masses with their pessimistic determinism.

    In 1995 Thomas Sowell identified these types in his book: The Vision of the Anointed: “The Vision of the Anointed is a book by economist and political columnist Thomas Sowell which brands the anointed as promoters of a worldview concocted out of fantasy impervious to any real-world considerations.”

    Indeed! These people are impervious to the real-world. Their fantasies are derived by making simple linear projections of things that they have not begun to understand. The simple and obvious fact that the predictions of the archaic computer model from 1973 are grossly wrong in every aspect, somehow still slips their awareness. Likewise, the simple and obvious fact that the climate models (largely a more sophisticated version of the 1973 joke) have no skill, also slips their grasp.

    This ‘imperviousness to any real-world considerations’ does not appear to be a function of low IQ, but the result of an over-inflated sense of self-importance! Indeed, the Anointed are generally educated and boast a moderately above average IQ, which only seems to bolster their delusions of self-importance even more.

    it is said that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. I would like to put that idea on steroids and say that there is nothing more dangerous than an intelligent, well-educated fool! You will find them clustering, like parasites, in the halls of government agencies, higher education and media centers. They are unified by the belief that everyone outside of their click is a moron, and deserves to be exploited, for their own good, of course!

  55. Just like the inanities of Malthus — reduce life to simple arithmetic equations and calculation doom to 10 decimal places were inaccurate — so the same here.
    Some of us realize that life in it’s many forms is, and has always been, ahead of the game when it comes to such simplistic reductionist ideas. Our world is an organized jumble of semi-stable chaotic states, that is what history shows us. It is not the simplistic straight line trends that over-educated imbeciles proffer.

  56. Mayan calendars are fun to make and you only need to point out the end point was meaningless to begin with but only when you get near the much publicized end.

  57. Is this how Al Gore and Richard Branson negotiated great real estate deals on breach front and island retreats?

  58. “Australian broadcaster ABC has republished its original report from the 1970s, since there is just two years until a major change is expected according to the computer model.”
    Let me guess – Trump gets elected to a 2nd term. Oh wait, that wouldn’t be a change, just more winning. Oops.

  59. Computer programs can generate almost any scenario you want. Here’s a simple one which predicts an even earlier doom:

    print “The world will end in 2022”

    It may need some embellishments and parenthesis to fit in your favorite computer language.

  60. Back in grad school we played with this model. It is so simple and full of absurd conclusions. You can make it do anything. It just extrapolates all trends that were in play in the 1970s, like runaway population growth and rising pollution and no agricultural revolution and no new oil discoveries yada yada. Absurd.

  61. They must have watched the ‘B’ movie; “2036 Origin Unknown”; that was released by Red Box this AM. LOL

  62. In some areas of New York and California, civilized life has already ceased to exist. Only the uncivil are left.

  63. This rerun of a Climte…er…Computer Model (Did they have to burn incense and have a blue light in the corner to make it work?) promotes only one message: “Eat, Drink and Make Mary for Tomorrow We Die!” (But first, vote for a carbon tax.)

  64. Damn, I only just finished unpacking my suitcase from the last end of the world scare. I think this time I’ll just stock up with cans of baked beans and beer and sit it out.

  65. “MIT computer model” was it ever V & V? ” It was originally devised by computer pioneer Jay Forrester, after he was tasked by the Club of Rome to develop a model of global sustainability.” I’ve read about the Club of Rome, they have always believed the earth is over populated but only the “elites” should rule and the rest should become serfs or “slaves”, take your pick.

  66. En el 2.040 serán 9000 millones de personas en el planeta,la POBREZA Y EL HAMBRE serán mayores. La contaminación atmosférica por la quema de combustibles fósiles matara a mucha gente.La CONTAMINACIÓN de los mares y océanos por la basura radioactiva y la pesca exagerada afecta a todos. La deforestacion,las guerras, el terrorismo, los GOBIERNOS INOPERANTES,CORRUPTOS,MENTIROSOS,LADRONES,DESPILFARRADORES están acabando con este hermoso planeta. Si no cambiamos,si no ponemos ORDEN se va a cumplir lo que predice la computadora.Es necesario SOLUCIONES.

  67. On the MIT story. First, it was run in 1973. The largest computer then was not as powerful as the hottest desktop you can build for gaming today. They call it an apocalyptic model, then backtrack and say it’s a sustainability model. So which is it? Is the model set up to give an apocalyptic outcome based on worst case assumptions or was this actually an unexpected outcome. If the model was based on Erlich’s assumptions in the 70’s then I’m surprised it didn’t come up with an earlier date.

    What they DON’T talk about is all the failed predictions from the model. Just another example of MSM alarmism.
    To me this isn’t news, but more a point of humor.

Comments are closed.